|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 06/30/2007 : 03:57:35
|
Damned if I can figger it out, so here it is in General Discussion, to the satisfaction of no one.
First off, to clear the mind and cleanse the palette: "Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the 'wall of separation between church and state,' therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society."
- Former US President Thomas Jefferson |
There. Now let's get to the meat and potatos of it.
Bush, Mideast Wars and End-Time Prophecy
By JP Briggs II, Ph.D., and Thomas D. Williams
t r u t h o u t | Special Report
Friday 29 June 2007
President George W. Bush has become dangerously steeped in ideas of Armageddon, the Apocalypse, an imminent war with Satanic forces in the Middle East, and an urgency to construct an American theocracy to fulfill God's end-of-days plan, according to close observers.
Historians and investigative journalists following the "end-time Christian" movement have grown alarmed at the impact it may be having on Bush's Middle East policies, including the current war in Iraq, the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian crisis, the strife in Lebanon and the administration's repeated attempts to find a cause for war against Iran.
Many people are aware that Bush is "the most aggressively religious president in American History," as eminent historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. described him, (Schlesinger, "War and the Presidency," 143) but most remain without a clue to what this actually means.
One piece of evidence is Bush's funneling billions of dollars to "faith-based" organizations. Faith offices making grants are now so widespread inside government agencies that federal watchdog officials have serious difficulties accounting for how much money has actually been spent. (Goldberg, "Kingdom Coming" 121). Marvin Olasky, a devotee of end-time theology, designed Bush's faith-based welfare concept. See also Goldberg, "Kingdom Coming," 110. |
Farther along we find: | Respected journalist Bill Moyers says that for the religious figures around Bush "a war with Islam in the Middle East is not something to be feared, but welcomed - an essential conflagration on the road to redemption." Scholars calculate that the group, which religion author Lynne Bundesen has dubbed "end-time Christians," has up to 40 million followers. Though not all may fully subscribe to the doomsday theology, they are inundated with it in books, megachurches, and on Christian broadcasting stations that reach millions upon millions of the faithful and are almost entirely dominated by end-time preachers. The messages come from "dispensationalists," who believe that true believers are close to the time of being "raptured," or drawn up into heaven by God, in the days before the final battles. They also emanate from various stripes of "dominionists" pushing to erect an American theocracy for the end-of-the-world wars against the anti-Christ. Read "Who Are The End-Time Christians?" |
And beyond that there is a brief list of the usual suspects including the husband & wife tag-team of Paul and Jan Crouch, whom I haven't heard much of lately. Prominent Groups and Individuals
"God requireth not a uniformity of religion to be enacted or enforced in any civil state; which uniformity sooner or later is the greatest occasion of civil war, ravishing of conscience, persecution of Christ Jesus in his servants and of hypocrisy and destruction of millions of souls." - Roger Williams, originator of either the first or second Baptist church established in America.
There are two major brands of end-time Christians: The "dispensationalists" hold that true believers will be "raptured" into heaven just before a cataclysmic war fought between "left behind" believers and the forces of the anti-Christ. "Dominionist" end-timers hold that the US as a Christian nation will play a special role representing God in the final battles, and dominionists work toward the construction (or "reconstruction") of an American theocracy to fulfill God's end-time plan. The two brands cross over and blend. Collectively they call themselves Christian Zionists to affirm their support of Israel's control over the holy lands (particularly the West Bank, Gaza and the Temple Mount in Jerusalem) because that control is a key prophetic "sign" for the Second Coming of Christ. The commonly used media terms "religious right" and "evangelical" obscure the powerful influence of the apocalyptical and theocratic end-time ideas and blur the fact that not all evangelicals or members of the religious right are end-time Christians. Estimates of the number of the end-timers range from 20 to 40 million. The catalogue below is far from complete.
|
If, after reading the whole thing, anyone feels like now might be a good time to get a good panic on, it just might be.
With apologies to Truth Out for the minor reformating.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
marty
BANNED
63 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 05:29:39 [Permalink]
|
I believe that there should be a blend of religion and government, but not to the point where the government endorses, requires, forces or creates one as happened in England starting in the 16th century. It is impossible to suggest that our political rulers should disregard their faith, or that we the people would want them to. It is necessary to have some moral and ethical character when governing and this type of character almost always comes from a religious belief system.
Not only should the political leaders have faith, they should encourage their people to find and practice a faith of their own. A country of people with out a moral system not only will fall apart, but should. |
 |
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
 Posted - 06/30/2007 : 06:24:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marty
I believe that there should be a blend of religion and government, but not to the point where the government endorses, requires, forces or creates one as happened in England starting in the 16th century. It is impossible to suggest that our political rulers should disregard their faith, or that we the people would want them to. It is necessary to have some moral and ethical character when governing and this type of character almost always comes from a religious belief system.
Not only should the political leaders have faith, they should encourage their people to find and practice a faith of their own. A country of people with out a moral system not only will fall apart, but should.
|
Why? |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 06:33:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marty
Not only should the political leaders have faith, they should encourage their people to find and practice a faith of their own. A country of people with out a moral system not only will fall apart, but should.
|
Why do you think that morality requires faith?
If I had to rely on one of two complete strangers to do "the right thing" on my behalf, where one was without faith, and the other had strong faith in some undisclosed religion, I know where my vote would go.
|
John's just this guy, you know. |
|
|
|
marty
BANNED
63 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 07:04:43 [Permalink]
|
People who ascribe to a faith, or a system of faith based beliefs tend to have more of a moral center than those who do not. It is the former, not the later, that I would want running my government.
Morality doesn't require faith, but it is more commonly found within people of faith. Why would you put your trust in someone who has no context for the reason behind their actions? |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 07:27:09 [Permalink]
|
| Morality doesn't require faith, but it is more commonly found within people of faith. |
What does this even mean? How do you come up with evidence to back up this claim, whatever it is? How do you measure "more commonly found?" What do you mean by 'morality' in this sentence? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 07:45:51 [Permalink]
|
So, what you're saying is that we can put more trust in a scientologist then an atheist because the scientologist has a faith based moral center.
You have made several assertions about who has a moral center and who does not. Care to support those assertions?
Marty:
Morality doesn't require faith, but it is more commonly found within people of faith. Why would you put your trust in someone who has no context for the reason behind their actions? |
Why do you think that the only context for morality is faith? I think that is demonstrably false, but I would love to hear your explanation for that and see what supporting evidence you have to make such a statement.
Have you found atheists to be less commonly moral? How so?
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 09:07:52 [Permalink]
|
As with religion, atheist get to make up the rules at their whim. The leaders of religion try to be like god in that they set the rules for their followers. Atheist, in the same manner as religious leaders; only not coercing others to follow, try to be like god and choose their own rules. It seems to me atheist choose their morals based on human history and trial & error, although I could be wrong about this and would like a clarification.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 09:13:12 [Permalink]
|
| People who ascribe to a faith, or a system of faith based beliefs tend to have more of a moral center than those who do not. |
What a crock. Care to back that up?
| Why would you put your trust in someone who has no context for the reason behind their actions? |
Obviously you don't understand what morality really is, or what atheism (or non-faith) is all about. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 06/30/2007 09:14:30 |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 09:18:26 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
As with religion, atheist get to make up the rules at their whim. The leaders of religion try to be like god in that they set the rules for their followers. Atheist, in the same manner as religious leaders; only not coercing others to follow, try to be like god and choose their own rules. It seems to me atheist choose their morals based on human history and trial & error, although I could be wrong about this and would like a clarification.
|
Your description of how atheists "make up their rules at their whim" is misleading at best. We had a long thread about this, and this is all you took out of it? Perhaps you should re-read the thread several times, then try to be honest.
All people end up making "their rules" based on the same basic concepts. Most people put a comfortable shell around this and call it god/faith/religion, to make it easier to swallow. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 06/30/2007 09:19:24 |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 10:25:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by pleco
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
As with religion, atheist get to make up the rules at their whim. The leaders of religion try to be like god in that they set the rules for their followers. Atheist, in the same manner as religious leaders; only not coercing others to follow, try to be like god and choose their own rules. It seems to me atheist choose their morals based on human history and trial & error, although I could be wrong about this and would like a clarification.
|
Your description of how atheists "make up their rules at their whim" is misleading at best. We had a long thread about this, and this is all you took out of it? Perhaps you should re-read the thread several times, then try to be honest.
All people end up making "their rules" based on the same basic concepts. Most people put a comfortable shell around this and call it god/faith/religion, to make it easier to swallow.
|
I did start a thread on this question. Actually the majority of the thread was an attack on my morality as opposed to an explanation of atheist morality. If you would like to explain atheist moral code I am more than willing to hear.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 06/30/2007 : 10:51:19 [Permalink]
|
It is all very simple and boring, indeed, to the point of ennui. As an atheist, my moral code, if we must call it that, is pretty much the same as a theist's without all the God nonsense.
Why is that so hard to understand?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 11:11:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I did start a thread on this question. Actually the majority of the thread was an attack on my morality as opposed to an explanation of atheist morality. If you would like to explain atheist moral code I am more than willing to hear. |
Jerome, no one "attacked" your morality. You simply completely missed the point of the arguments being made, which was that despite your belief that you get your morality from the bible and the 10 commandments, you really don't. That much was demonstrated to you. But rather than reaching an epiphany and acknowledging the source of your morality must come from someplace else, you never made any attempts to pursue that line of discourse. Instead of understanding that your morals come from the exact same place as atheists get theirs (which could have led to a quite fruitful discussion), you decided to become offended and obstinately defend an inadequate explanation.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 06/30/2007 11:13:17 |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 11:14:26 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
It is all very simple and boring, indeed, to the point of ennui. As an atheist, my moral code, if we must call it that, is pretty much the same as a theist's without all the God nonsense.
Why is that so hard to understand?
|
How is that "code" determined? How are standards defined? Does every atheist have a separate individual "code"?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 11:22:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marty
People who ascribe to a faith, or a system of faith based beliefs tend to have more of a moral center than those who do not. |
That's false. Studies have shown that it is level of education, not religiosity, which leads to the greatest moral behavior. In fact, less-educated people tend to be more religious, so there is actually greater link between people of faith and crime than between the non-religious.
| It is the former, not the later, that I would want running my government. |
I can understand how you arrive at this position, but it is based on faulty reasoning and misinformation. If you knew the true facts, you would probably want the least-religious people in office as possible.
| Morality doesn't require faith, but it is more commonly found within people of faith. |
No, again that's wrong. Morality is a human universal, and is not found more commonly among people with faith. If anything, faith can prove a hindrance to morality, since appeals to the supernatural often lead people to disregard the importance of this life for a promised reward in another "magical" one.
| Why would you put your trust in someone who has no context for the reason behind their actions? |
Why would you put your trust in someone who uses a false context for the reason behind their actions?
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 06/30/2007 11:23:25 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Religion or Politics? Where to put it?
